With regard to the G8 Summit in Muskoka, what are the details of all contracts for goods or services relating to the G8 meetings, providing for each contract (i) the name of the contractor, (ii) a description of the goods or services provided, (iii) the value of the contract, (iv) whether or not there was an open bidding process for the contract?

With regard to the G20 Summit in Toronto, what are the details of all contracts for goods or services relating to the G20 meetings, providing for each contract (i) the name of the contractor, (ii) a description of the goods or services provided, (iii) the value of the contract, (iv) whether or not there was an open bidding process for the contract?

With regard to expenditures for the G20 and G8 summits, what are the details of all expenditures related to the summits but not accounted for in either the 2010-2011 Main or Supplementary Estimates, providing for each expenditure (i) the value of the expenditure, (ii) the goods or services consumed, (iii) the department under which the expenditure is accounted for, (iv) whether or not the contract was tendered through an open bidding process if the goods or services were purchased from an outside source?

With regard to all government announcements pertaining to the North, made by any department between January 2006 and the present: (a) when was each announcement made; and (b) what is the status of each announcement as concerns, (i) implementation, (ii) policy change and status of the policy, (iii) the budget set aside for the implementation and the actual expenditure on the program implementation, (iv) procurement of materials for announced programs, (v) status of planning for implementation and program delivery, (vi) relevant budget business plans, (vii) projected completion dates for announced programs, (viii) benefits of the program for Northern residents, (ix) consultations with Northern residents and territorial governments, (x) the reasons why completion targets have not been met or start up dates have been delayed?

With regard to the Marquee Tourism Events program for the last two fiscal years: (a) who applied for funding; (b) who was awarded funding; (c) how much funding did each successful applicant receive; and (d) what applications were deemed qualified but were not approved by the minister?

Mr. Speaker, today I rise to request an emergency debate on the government's decision to scrap the mandatory long form census. The importance and urgency of this matter really cannot be overstated.

More than 350 organizations and expert panels have decried the consequences of the government's decision to get rid of the mandatory long-form census.

Academics, business leaders, statisticians, municipalities, health care providers, social agencies and non-profit sectors have all decried the proposed changes because they count on this information to do their work.

Last week even the Governor of the Bank of Canada, Mark Carney, said that scrapping the long form census could hurt the bank's data on important issues affecting the economy, like productivity, labour data and household economies, all of which are vital markers for assessing the strength of our economy.

This House cannot fulfill its mandate without the data collected on the long-form census, without knowing who our citizens are, where they live and what types of situations they are in.

Government departments, from Health Canada to Veterans Affairs, rely on census data, and without the long-form census they will not be able to deliver on their responsibilities to Canadians or answer the questions that Canadians or members of Parliament have about the important issues facing us.

The government made its decision to scrap the long-form census without any discussion with parliamentarians, the public, or even experts at the National Statistics Council, which it appoints precisely to provide this sort of evidence.

I have spoken with our members about the practical implications of this matter, and I will give one example. The member for Acadie—Bathurst told me that it was not a question of going in and finding out what goes on in people's bedrooms. Rather, it is a question of finding out how many bedrooms there are compared with how many children there are. We know that there is an overcrowding problem resulting from the crisis of affordable housing in this country. Members who question whether this is true should visit any remote first nations community, where three or four families, 15 or 16 people, sometimes live in houses built by the federal government for only one family. These members will then see what I mean.

Maybe the government does not want to know about rising inequality in our society and its impacts; maybe it prefers not to have the information. But that does not make it right. In fact, this is very shortsighted policy.

If we do not act immediately, and I have to speak to the timeliness of this issue, there will be irreversible damage to Canada's vital statistical resources, because the information collected in this census will not be comparable with information from past census processes.

The deadline for printing the 2011 census is fast approaching. It is not too late, but time is of the essence.

Every day that goes by is a missed opportunity to restore and protect the continuity and comparability of our national data. Other countries are looking at us: they work with us in the assembly of data internationally, and they are worried about the quality of Canadian data that will result from this change.

We cannot afford such missed opportunities. There is virtually no more time left. Parliament has to debate it immediately. The implications are serious and significant, and therefore meet the test for entering into an emergency debate.

Only an emergency debate will give this important matter the attention it deserves.

That is why New Democrats hope that you will favourably consider this request, Mr. Speaker.